Thanks for your patronising comments, never mind i'm new to Nikon and never had to shoot raw with my Canon to achieve good quality jpegs that i was happy with.

Regardless of whether or not you like the comments it's true. Canon = good out of the camera jpgs, Nikon will generally give you a better final product......but it requires some work.

roustabout66 wrote:

You seem to be jumping through a lot of hoops to get results you clearly consider inferior to your Canon. The 5100 body is MASSIVELY inferior to your 50D: no mirror lock up, no focus fine tune, no high speed flash sync, no depth of field preview, plastic vs metal body, smallish pentamirror vs glass pentaprism, one control wheel vs two, etc. etc. etc. It seems to me this was a downgrade in every way except size. I see a lot of people on these forums who get caught up in DXO sensor ratings that have little if any impact in real life shooting. That is why I have recommended that people download test files from here and other sites and trust your eyes instead of some numerical rating.

LMAO - remind me again what exactly is the heart of the camera? ......oh, that would be the sensor. All the other ones are pretty much perference. Example - I would like a larger viewfinder, but DOF preview is pretty useless because.......gasp....I have an idea of the f-stop.

But you're right - DXO is full of stuff as sensor technology hasn't improved since 2008.

And while we're at it explain away the D5100 (& D7000) excells at higher ISO.....the 50D was rated below it's own predcessor @ higher ISO in the DPR review?